Showing posts with label Email. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Email. Show all posts
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Open Meetings Law and Public Expectation
3:14 AM | 
Posted by
Lance M. Gundersen, Sr.
A recent Leader Herald editorial bemoaned the lack of openness regarding the recently concluded Grandeaux investigation of EmailGate at City Hall. As happened in the Margiotta dismissal of 2007 and Harzinski dismissal of 2008, the information on why the decisions were made, as well as the findings of various investigations, were not generally available to the public.
It is common in such situations for people to believe a cover-up of some sort is in progress; and, in all honesty, now that I've been out of office for nearly two years, I can much better appreciate the sentiment.
But that doesn't change the law - and not just the law for the law's sake, but the law and the reason the law exists the way it does. The reasons for executive session are clearly delineated in the New York State open Meetings Law, and, either within the law itself or within the many dozens of findings and adjudications that have been rendered in the years since it was created, good reasons to explain why something should remain in executive session have been provided.
The current argument as expressed on the Gloversville BID Board is that an elected official shouldn't have the same privacy as a non-elected employee. Something about the nature of the whole election thing makes some people feel a different level of transparency is required.
While I can certainly appreciate the sentiment, here is what one portion of the law states as a reason for an executive session, "f. the medical, financial, credit or employment history of a particular person or corporation, or matters leading to the appointment, employment, promotion, demotion, discipline, suspension, dismissal or removal of a particular person or corporation;"
http://www.dos.state.ny.us/coog/openmeetlaw.html
While rather broad, we can look upon this and see that this most recent affair allegedly regarding Councilman Castiglione does indeed discuss the employment history of a particular person (Castiglione) and has the potential, under City Code Section 25-9, to result in "discipline," or "removal" of said individual.
Ergo, the law would seem to apply.
Of course, if there is a question as to its applicability, it would certainly stand to reason that anyone could send a letter to the Committee on Open Government seeking an advisory opinion on the matter.
Regardless of whether or not the law applies to elected officials, it should be pointed out that several existing advisory opinions located at the web address given above clearly indicate that except for information that runs afoul of other higher state or federal laws, executive sessions are always optional. Yes, there are 8 specific reasons that they can be held, but just because an executive session can be used does not mean it should be used.
And, perhaps, in some areas it just shouldn't be used. If doing so, whether legal or not, will only serve to anger the voters, and if publicly releasing the information will not have any particularly horrible effect upon the city, person or corporation, then by all means air the dirty laundry.
It is common in such situations for people to believe a cover-up of some sort is in progress; and, in all honesty, now that I've been out of office for nearly two years, I can much better appreciate the sentiment.
But that doesn't change the law - and not just the law for the law's sake, but the law and the reason the law exists the way it does. The reasons for executive session are clearly delineated in the New York State open Meetings Law, and, either within the law itself or within the many dozens of findings and adjudications that have been rendered in the years since it was created, good reasons to explain why something should remain in executive session have been provided.
The current argument as expressed on the Gloversville BID Board is that an elected official shouldn't have the same privacy as a non-elected employee. Something about the nature of the whole election thing makes some people feel a different level of transparency is required.
While I can certainly appreciate the sentiment, here is what one portion of the law states as a reason for an executive session, "f. the medical, financial, credit or employment history of a particular person or corporation, or matters leading to the appointment, employment, promotion, demotion, discipline, suspension, dismissal or removal of a particular person or corporation;"
http://www.dos.state.ny.us/coog/openmeetlaw.html
While rather broad, we can look upon this and see that this most recent affair allegedly regarding Councilman Castiglione does indeed discuss the employment history of a particular person (Castiglione) and has the potential, under City Code Section 25-9, to result in "discipline," or "removal" of said individual.
Ergo, the law would seem to apply.
Of course, if there is a question as to its applicability, it would certainly stand to reason that anyone could send a letter to the Committee on Open Government seeking an advisory opinion on the matter.
Regardless of whether or not the law applies to elected officials, it should be pointed out that several existing advisory opinions located at the web address given above clearly indicate that except for information that runs afoul of other higher state or federal laws, executive sessions are always optional. Yes, there are 8 specific reasons that they can be held, but just because an executive session can be used does not mean it should be used.
And, perhaps, in some areas it just shouldn't be used. If doing so, whether legal or not, will only serve to anger the voters, and if publicly releasing the information will not have any particularly horrible effect upon the city, person or corporation, then by all means air the dirty laundry.
Labels:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
About Me
.jpeg)
- Lance M. Gundersen, Sr.
- A lot of authors and bloggers have written about living intentionally. Each define it differently, but the basic gist of the idea is to have a plan and do everything in one's power to make it a reality. My plan was to live debt-free, and then spend my time doing the things I want to do - like finishing at least a Master's in an area I can put to use in my community. I started this process with a Masters in Work and Labor Policy with an Advanced Certificate in City Administration, but then switched to a Master's in Urban Planning focusing on Bike and Pedestrian Infrastructure (and learning a fair bit about environmental planning, Brownfield redevelopment, community planning and more). I have also begun accomplishing a whole basket of cycling, sailing, hiking and personal enrichment goals which are each in various states of accomplishment. Feel free to stop by and read my musings. Comment if you like. Please be respectful, and I apologize that it's even necessary to have to say that at this stage of our existence.
